User talk:Resident Mario/Archive 2
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
|
||
Hawaii hotspot
I noticed you were having a little difficulty with the images on this article. Perhaps I wasn't specific enough in my GA review, let me explain. You should only remove the images that are not directly relevant to the article. A few examples are the animation of the atoll formation, photo of the tree molds, and the map of hotspots around the world.
One good question to ask yourself before adding an image is "Does this image add to the reader's understanding of the article's subject?" Just because you mention Pele's hair doesn't mean you need to add an image of it, especially when the reader may click on the article for pele's hair and see the exact same image there as well. With so many images available for this article, you need to really think about which ones really belong in the article. If the image can be found in other articles which this article links to, get rid of it. You also removed an image of a poster (Image:Hawaii hotspot poster.jpg) which is semi-redundant (it seems the top half is used as the image in the infobox), but the bottom half would be useful in this article. Is there an existing crop of the bottom half that you could add to this article?
Also, you seem to have reduced the size of some of the images. My point was to get you to remove these parameters entirely. Images should not have a size specified. Now, that being said, the lead image, or images of maps and detailed diagrams may be enlarged to show detail if necessary (and only if the image would aid the reader's understanding of the article). Generally speaking, diagrams should be specified to display at no larger than 300px. Larger pixel sizes are permitted, but they should be used sparingly and only if the image or diagram is central to the reader's understanding of the article. If one decides to specify a size larger than 300px, the image should also be centered for asthetic reasons. Also, images that are displayed in the vertical format (e.g., the portrait orientation, commonly used for portraits of persons) should have the upright| parameter added.
Please see MOS:IMAGES and WP:Layout#Images for official policy regarding these suggestions.
On another note, right now I would concentrate on improving the introduction. This is perhaps the most important part of the article. It should be an interesting and concise summary of the entire article. Often readers only read the intro, look at the pictures (while reading the captions), and then move on. I usually stress to editors that the introduction and image captions are the two most important parts of your article because these are often the only parts a casual reader will see. If they are not interested by then, they will not even read your article at all. This is why I stress the images and the introduction so much, because many editors often ignore these parts and concentrate on sourcing and prose (which is still an important part of the article, don't get me wrong). But if you want a successful article, that draws people in and keeps their interest, you should improve the lead and photos/captions first. For a good example of image placement and introductory paragraph, see Formation and evolution of the Solar System.
I hope this helps, I'm not trying to nitpick you but it seemed like you were getting flustered over the whole image thing. It doesn't have to be painful, in fact, by the time this GA is over you will probably be surprised at how much the article has improved (I would even suggest a peer review, followed by a Featured Article nomination, this is just the kind of article they would be willing to put on the front page, if it was improved enough). By the way, how many GAs or FAs have you written? Your userpage doesn't display correctly on my browswer (IE 7), and I'm not sure if you're a newbie or an oldie and all that crap, so excuse me if I'm telling you anything you already know. Also, if you couldn't tell already, I tend to get a bit long-winded, and I apologize, but it just happens. ;P --ErgoSum88 (talk) 20:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- IE7? I use IE7. It should work fine. Right now, I have 7 DYKs, 2 GAs (and 1 failed GA), and a FAC. I'm not new to this game; I've been around since December 2008. Can you tell me what problems you're having with the page? ResMar 21:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with File:Loihi bot.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Loihi bot.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps invitation
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- Since I am unfamiliar with your GA review skills, could you provide some of your previous reviews so I have something to reference to your review abilities? And by the way, remember to transclude any GA sweeps action back into the article's talk page, such as in Talk:Decade Volcanoes[1] Please follow this sweeps process so that the format and layout will be consistent throughout all articles reviewed by different editors. OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: FT
Yeah, it's leading up to an FT. :) — neuro(talk) 22:15, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I'm working on the lists with Ironholds (talk · contribs), so he might also be a good person to ask. :) — neuro(talk) 00:10, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Age and growth of Loihi
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The/a
Mario, hi, we spoke before about my unfinished tute. Although the Internet desperately needs a tutorial on this difficult aspect of English grammar for non-native speakers, my tute you've linked to is in a very early state, and I'm concerned it might be misleading. I haven't properly worked out how to structure it, but I know it can be done somehow. It may be fixed by July or September, when I'll have time to work on it. In the meantime, your transclusion is just a repeat of this explanation and a vaguely useful external link. I'll let you know when it's done. Tony (talk) 16:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Archival
Don't be discouraged. FAs take a ton of flawless work. Please, remind me to get around to a copy edit soon, I'd like to help you complete your tasks. ceranthor 23:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- It's sad that no one cared enough to vote. The article didn't fail in the sense that there was no activity there. Nearly 2 weeks at FAC and nearly no activity. How messed up is that? :( Are there no editors who care enough? Sometimes my work feels unappreciated...sigh. ResMar 01:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- That's it I'm totally going to start spamming, hard. This is ridiculous, how the process just ran itself dry. it's even worse for GANs and Peer reviews. Maybe if I start knocking a few heads, people will listen.
Well, it does frustrate me, as does how Hawaii hotspot sat at GAN for over a month before someone picked it up. ResMar 01:27, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, fuck it. Its time will come. Among other things Wikipedia has taught me to be patient. ResMar 01:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- I was afraid I would have a conflict of interest with the article so I assumed good faith that I shouldn't review. Looks like it would've been promoted, actually, considering Mattisse just supported. ceranthor 01:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, fuck it. Its time will come. Among other things Wikipedia has taught me to be patient. ResMar 01:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Mattisse is relatively deeply involved with the article, and is number 3 by number of edits (behind me and Vid). It's encouraging, but a motion that came too late. ResMar 01:39, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- g2g. because of certain issues I shall not be editing tomorrow. Happy
holidayser, spring. ResMar 01:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)- Alright, I'm really getting ready for a massive rehaul of Earthquake over the next few weeks, I've expanded it a lot since I first started there, and have referenced some sections too. ceranthor 01:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- I can see that. But be careful; working with such large articles is tedious and oppressive. I guess colab'ing is good. ResMar 02:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I'm buried in work, but as I haven't edited it, I'll review it. I just need to find the time to be thorough. Ping me at my talk if there's a hurry. Awickert (talk) 01:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- Got through geology, that's as far as I'm going to get for a little while; you can review my tags and changes. Awickert (talk) 21:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Mount Kenya GAN
Recently, you nominated an article, Mount Kenya, as a Good article. I have reviewed the article and have placed it on hold for the reasons given on the review page. The concerns I have raised entirely concern referencing and coverage. I look forward to promoting that article once my concerns have been dealt with. Thank you. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 06:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Current projects
Just a few promises for myself:
- Loihi - Copyedit, FAC
- Hawaii hotspot - GAN, Peer, Copyedit, FAC
- History of rum (sndbx) - Create, extensive Copyedit, Peer, GAN, Feedback, FAC
ResMar 00:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Delisting GA Material properties of diamond
I have brushed up jargon (well, some is intrinsic to this important topic, please delete what you find unnecessary) and updated references in Material properties of diamond. Unfortunately, I haven't written this article, only patched it, but I am willing to watch and improve it. I have long personal scientific experience in this topic, and thus updating, no matter how laborious it might look, should not take more than a day (this refers to any my project you come across ;). Should I renominate this article for GA, or you might re-review it without that ? Best regards.NIMSoffice (talk) 06:01, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- Wow! That was fast! If I had realized that you could fix the refs just like that, I would have put it on hold...Alright, I'll do a go-over and leave my comments on the talk page. Are you trying to get a FT for Diamonds? As for the jargon, to a certain point it's tollarable, as long as the terms are either wikilinked or explained in parentheses-which they are. I meant to add to that comment "but that's kind of inavoidable." You do seem to be a professional on the subject! ResMar 18:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Two absolutely irrelevant comments: 1) your userpage seems odd at my PC (WinXP,firefox,1024x768) - right figure gets shifted below left one; 2) I have long experience of refereeing scientific papers in various fields, have nominated/reviewed GAs on WP, and I am a fan of WP. (I mean I referee much better than I write) How can I help WP with that ? (except for GAN and peer review portals) ? NIMSoffice (talk) 10:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Butting in since I happen to have not left town: there are wikiprojects in a variety of fields. For example, I edit mostly within the scope of the geology project. They are nice because you run into others who also know what they're doing, and are often very helpful, and you get to contribute within your area of expertise. Awickert (talk) 10:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Oh - with your modification in mind, then I would still recommend finding a wikiproject suited to your skills. They each have assessment and peer review areas. So that's sort of not that different from what you were saying, but there's often a backlog in internal peer-review and assessment within each of the wikiprojects. Awickert (talk) 10:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Anyway, what about GAD/GAN Material properties of diamond ? Any chance to get it back to GA ? NIMSoffice (talk) 05:12, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
File:Loihi bot.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Loihi bot.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. PhilKnight (talk) 11:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
FYI
Deletion of Bilateral relation pages despite ongoing merging effort Ed Fitzgerald t / c 08:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Precambrian volcanism
Thought you would like to see my new photos I jst uploaded on Commons: Image:Temagami greenstone belt pillow lava.jpg, Image:Temagami greenstone belt pillow lava2.jpg, Image:Temagami greenstone belt pillow lava3.jpg. Black Tusk (talk) 00:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
batch 2
FA nom
Hawaii hotspot is a very interesting article. If you are interested in nominating this article for FA, I would be willing to help, if you would be willing to list me as a co-nominator. Half the work is already taken care of, as the article is well-sourced and we should have no problems there. MOS issues have been taken care of, although there might be a few I missed. The big problem will be prose, ugh, people always complain that "the prose could be better". But I am pretty good at improving prose (at least I'd like to think so), and I would be willing to put a lot of work into improving the readability of the article.
I see you were frustrated at the results of your last FA nom, Loihi Seamount, and I think you got a raw deal. But trust me, it happens all the time. If an article does not garner enough support comments (even if there are no oppose comments), it will be failed. And it is ok to disagree with the reviewer's comments, but try to do it as politely as possible. Also, it is not uncommon for the nomination to drag out for months (my last nom lasted almost 2 months), so it is easy to get frustrated, I know, but it is better to just work on other things instead of complaining about how long the process is taking (no offense). Just stick with it, and if they fail the article, then it doesn't hurt to simply nominate again later, and it doesn't hurt to familiarize yourself with the major points of the MOS in the meantime.
But anyway, think about it, and let me know. I would be willing to do most of the work, but etiquitte dictates that I consult with major contributors before engaging an FA nom. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 21:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'll also pitch in on copy editing. Just ping me! ceranthor 01:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sweet, it will take some time. It needs a PR first and some major copyediting. I'm 2/0 in the FA department (i.e., I have yet to experience a failed nomination), so hopefully I can keep the streak alive. It will take some work, but I'm confident this will succeed. My first two I handled all by myself, but with some help from you guys, I think this will be a breeze. I'll keep you updated, I'm thinking about another month or so and it will be ready. I will make this my top priority. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 02:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'll also pitch in on copy editing. Just ping me! ceranthor 01:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Good work; I just saw Hawaii hotspot listed as a GA on the 19th. Viriditas (talk) 11:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Heheheh, ResMar, did you read what ErgoSum wrote above about "do it as politely as possible." Starting off your second FA nom with "I was very unimpressed by the first nomination" won't go over well. :) Try to tone it down a bit, ok? Your friend, Viriditas (talk) 01:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- I speakith the truth. Rm'd. ResMar 15:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, but it would help to change your approach. For example, before listing Loihi for the second time, you want to cover all your bases and avoid what happened last time. That means making sure you have enough reviewers (from all sides) to give a review. Have you contacted the most active members of the geology, volcano, seamount, and Hawaii projects and asked them to give a neutral review? Viriditas (talk) 21:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
US Airways
Hey, sorry it took me a while to respond about an FA for US Airways Flight 1549. I definitely agree that it's come a long way and could be pushed to FA if properly nominated, etc, but I've really been rather uninvolved in the editing since the first few days of the accident. I'd encourage you to go for it if you are willing to try out the FA process, otherwise perhaps bring up the idea on the article's talk page. It would make a good one year anniversary front-pager ; ) Joshdboz (talk) 14:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- It would make an excellent front-pager. I can't nominate it though—I was never involved in it... ResMar 21:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Questions about Hawaii hotspot
From time to time I suppose I will have questions about sourcing in this article, if you do not know, or can't remember, no big deal. I will find the answer myself and make any changes that are necessary. But during the FA process, the sources will be severely scrutinized by many editors, so I want to get this right.
My first question is, where did the figure of "over 129 volcanoes" come from? I was reading the USGS paper, "Volcanism in Hawaii" and it says "at least 107", but then again it is rather old. I checked the references that appear after each mention of this figure and none of them say anything about 129 volcanoes.
Second question, the "Hotspot theory" section states that the pacific plate changed direction 50 million years ago. But I seem to remember one of the sources stating that the pacific plate definitely did not change direction. Was this overlooked, or is there proof that the pacific plate has changed direction? --ErgoSum•talk•trib 21:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- About the "mythology" section, this definitely should be the first section. The order of section headings should follow a chronological order which starts with the oldest information first. Since the native Hawaiians were the first to notice the age-progression of the islands, it should be listed first. In its current placement, it has no context, and I don't see it drawing analogies to any pre-existing concepts within the article. Even if it did, it could be changed to avoid confusion. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 03:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree. The section is on a minor sidetopic, making it a poor start to the article. The lead section should elaborate on the lead, not go off about secondary things. Also you're thinking this in the wrong context; for most articles history and/or signifigance goes first, but not so here, because the theoretics behind the hotspot, the hotspot theory itself, is generally unknown by the wider public. ResMar 19:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree, but there are better things to worry about right now. Why does it belong between "characteristics" and "evolution"? It makes no sense in it's current position, it should be either first or last. Last because it is a minor sidetopic, or first in a chronological order. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 00:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Could go last; better if put before the table though. ResMar 22:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Exactly. Ok I'm glad we could agree. And you read my mind about the PR, I was going to do that tomorrow, but you beat me to it! --ErgoSum•talk•trib 00:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- O, and Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Loihi Seamount/archive2 is going in, too. Sorely needs attention. ResMar 00:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- Exactly. Ok I'm glad we could agree. And you read my mind about the PR, I was going to do that tomorrow, but you beat me to it! --ErgoSum•talk•trib 00:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- Could go last; better if put before the table though. ResMar 22:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree, but there are better things to worry about right now. Why does it belong between "characteristics" and "evolution"? It makes no sense in it's current position, it should be either first or last. Last because it is a minor sidetopic, or first in a chronological order. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 00:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
List of tallest buildings in San Diego FLC
I responded to your comments at the List of tallest buildings in San Diego FLC. I added an explanation concerning the ranking before the table which should hopefully alleviate any confusion other readers have. Thanks for taking a look at the list and let me know if you notice anything else it needs. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Userpage designer
Do you ever make charges for userpage designs? (like roux with 25 major edits per userpage renovation). - Damërung ...ÏìíÏ..._ΞΞΞ_ . -- 07:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
batch beta
Hotspot gallery
If you haven't noticed, I have created a gallery for Hawaii hotspot over on the commons at Hawaii hotspot. There are a few images from the article which could be uploaded over to the commons, as commons accepts free images, but fair use images must remain on WP servers. If you have a lot of them, you can put in a bot request as there is currently a bot which is uploading all the free images from WP over to the commons. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 18:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps June update
Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 396 articles were swept in May! That more than doubles our most successful month of 163 swept articles in September 2007 (and the 2 articles swept in April)! I plan to be sending out updates at the beginning of each month detailing any changes, updates, or other news until Sweeps are completed. So if you get sick of me, keep reviewing articles so we can be done (and then maybe you'll just occasionally bump into me). We are currently over 60% done with Sweeps, with just over a 1,000 articles left to review. With over 40 members, that averages out to about 24 articles per person. If each member reviews an article a day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. I know that may be asking for a lot, but it would allow us to complete Sweeps and allow you to spend more time writing GAs, reviewing GANs, or focusing on other GARs (or whatever else it is you do to improve Wikipedia) as well as finish ahead of the two-year mark coming up in August. I recognize that this can be a difficult process at times and appreciate your tenacity in spending time in ensuring the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 18:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Review?
1968 Illinois earthquake has been sitting at FAC, and it hasn't seen many reviews yet. If at all possible, could you review it? Editorofthewiki has returned! You haven't met him yet, but he is very helpful towards earth science articles, and has helped me many a time to bring them to higher standards. ceranthor 12:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Mononomic (talk) 03:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:48, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Mononomic (talk) 01:04, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Loihi FAC
Just wanted to let you know that I dumped a few comments and questions on you. I know it's a lot, but you indicated you wanted some sort of feedback, and I was kind of frustrated at the lack of actionable feedback on my FAC, so I kind of unloaded. You've got a lot of good information in there, and the image work and charts are particularly inspired. That's something I need to work on, myself. Keep it up! JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, I'm more than happy to do another review here. I can't get to it immediately, but it'll be done in the next 24 hours or so. JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: Mismo
It might be a good idea to either 1) find more references, or 2) consider merging this stub into a longer article, perhaps about cocktails. Viriditas (talk) 09:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: Loihi 2
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Niihau
No hurry on this, but I wanted to place a seed in your mind. I'm interested in briging Niihau to FA status. We still need to expand the geology/volcano section for the extinct Niihau volcano, so if you have time to contribute or can remember any good refs, swing on by to the article or talk page. BTW, is it even listed on {{Hawaiian volcanism}}? Viriditas (talk) 23:32, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
I'm not sure if it is today of not, but you said you received a laptop, so I'm sending you a birthday greeting anyway. :-) Viriditas (talk) 01:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Finally available
I really must apologize-I haven't been able to help you or Viriditas on any projects yet! But Illinois e-quake just got an oppose !vote, so I'm cleaning it up; it will most likely pass, though. After that, I can help you guys on a project. Any suggestions? All I have other than that would be to copyedit Galilean moons for two other Solar System project acquantainces, but that should be relatively simple. ceranthor 19:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- Obviously the long-term thing is Kilauea. But in the short term, I need a final lookie at Loihi (seeing you were busy with your FAc and that long-winded oppose, I asked Edd instead). Also, I'll eventually bring to bear on Kohala, but that's more long term. Oh, and how's the map I got for you? It was a request at the Graphics Lab :) ResMar 19:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Rumford Prize
That's fantastic! You'll need to redo the referencing if you want the FL people to be happy bunnies though. Check out the rumford medal and see what we've done there - the official reference goes under "General" at the bottom (rather than being cited in "notes") and third-party refs are cited in the "notes" column. The format was actually suggested by the FL people (we did about eight of the things) and works quite nicely, I feel. There was a project to get all the RS medals and awards up to featured quality, which is currently on hold due to lack of time, but if you're interested in helping out with that kind of thing I'm sure we can work out some kind of collaboration on the subject :). Ironholds (talk) 23:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- OK, modified. Wait, didn't you FL all of the prizes yet? The other, younger "prizes" are all quite short and youthful. Maybe I'll do a few for you; I have my mostly full with Haw. Volcanism right now though. ResMar 03:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Hawaii hotspot is ready
I think I've done everything I can for it. The prose is good, pictures are good... oh that reminds me. I nominated the lead image of Hawaii hotspot for FP (see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hawaii Bathymetry, but it failed to garner enough comments. I'm going to try again, I think it will pass. But in the meantime I think we should nominate Hawaii hotspot for FA, I'm fairly confident it will pass. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 22:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
- Wow! That's fantastic!
I'm doing a bit of juggling right now, between Rumford Prize and Loihi and now this; but I will do my best to be of assistance. It looks good. ResMar 01:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm glad you like it. And if I may offer my opinion, I would wait a while before nominating Loihi again. Regulars will get sick of seeing it nominated again and again, especially if you haven't put a lot of work into it between noms. Meanwhile, I'm going to nominate Hawaii hotspot myself and list you and me as co-nominators. Don't worry if you're too busy to assist, I can handle it, just relax and work on Loihi some more. If there is something I need your help with I'll let you know. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 15:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- Right, well, I've been busy with something else entirely. Ergo, can you leave comments on the FL? My Featured Noms tend to die a lot. ResMar 16:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
FLC
I have watchlisted the page and will eventually return to address your nomination, so reminders are unnecessary. Thanks—Chris! ct 21:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- That's what I realized :) I'm just thrilled this is going smoothly. ResMar 18:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Rumford Prize
|
On June 25, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rumford Prize, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Northern Cordilleran volcanoes
Just letting you know I recently did a total rewrite on List of Northern Cordilleran volcanoes. Black Tusk (talk) 20:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Wow, great! You should nominate it for FLC. ResMar 20:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- That is what I was thinking as well. Black Tusk (talk) 21:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Rumford Prize
I sent you a couple more PDFs by email. Also, I found a little tid-bit in another journal, which I will post in my userspace. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Hawaii articles
Hello, I see you are a volcano expert, so wanted to make sure you noticed a little work I was doing on the Hawaii articles after a recent visit. See 1790 Footprints (expanded) Hawaiian Volcano Observatory (expanded and submitted for DYK), Thomas Jaggar (expanded) and Volcano House (new, submitted for DYK). I tried to find the Whitney Vault for a picture but I think what I got was a water cistern. I am also developing an article on George Lycurgis, the owner of the Volcano House who raised money for the first observatory, and started an aricle on Titus Coan a missionary 1833 - 1881 who wrote some of the first observations of Kilauea. If you have any time to review them or link them in, etc. that would be greatly appreciated, thanks. W Nowicki (talk) 19:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- Just a note, Res, if you're overwhelmed, my second RfA is tanking, so I'm willing to take this up. ceranthor 16:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Volcano expert? Oh shucks :) I have a problem right now. I'm going on vacation for two weeks TODAY, and it's doutful I can get internet out there. I was hoping to finish my rumford prize FLC, but it appears I can't at this point...Cer, can you take over and finish the thing? It's got 5 supports and 1 and 1/4 opposes (I finished most of Rambling Man's issues, Dabomb's seems a bit unexplained). I'm sure if you ask Dabomb he'll send you the PDFs he sent me. Big thanks if you do it. ResMar 19:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps July update
Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 290 articles were swept in June! Last month was our second most successful month in reviewing articles (after May). We are currently over 70% done with Sweeps, with just under 800 articles left to review. With nearly 50 members, that averages out to about 15 articles per person. If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. This may sound difficult, but if everyone completes their reviews, Sweeps would be completed in less than two years when we first started (with only four members!). With the conclusion of Sweeps, each editor could spend more time writing GAs, reviewing at the backlogged GAN, or focusing on other GARs. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 18:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)
The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps August update
Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 215 articles were swept in July! We are currently nearly 80% done with Sweeps, with under 600 articles left to review. With 50 members, that averages out to about 12 articles per person. Once the remaining articles drop to 100, I'll help in reviewing the last articles (I'm currently taking a break). If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 19:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)
The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
NatGeo
Do you have National Geographic? There is a special tonight on the ocean floor, I expect a segment on seamounts, and hopefully, Loihi. It will help you feel proud about your work... ceranthor 21:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yup, there's a lot about Loihi... ceranthor 01:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yes I do have it. I don't see the article you are mentioning though. Issue and page? ResMar 14:27, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
...Oh. ResMar 15:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- I just watched it, its called Drain the Oceans or something like that. It talks about the Hawaii hotspot and features the bathymetry photo (the lead photo in Hawaii hotspot) that I tried in vain to get promoted to a featured picture. Oh well, I guess we were ahead of our time. We should try again for both FA and FP. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 21:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I dream of horses @ 15:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--I dream of horses @ 23:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--I dream of horses @ 01:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey
Hi, how's Loihi coming? Illinois earthquake is at FAC again, hopefully to pass this time. I had the prose checked out by Steve, whom I would suggest for Loihi, along with Malleus Fatuorum. However, the best scientific copy editor I've ever seen (no offense to normal copy editors, like the two above) was Awickert, be sure to contact him about the prose. He's awesome, and helped with Nevado. ceranthor 13:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- To tell you the truth I haven't been on very muh latelty, after the closing of Rumford Prize I've sorta lagged off and concentrated on other things. I've turned over a little to gamefaqs.com and have recently become addiced to Armagetron Advanced. I'll return eventually but for now I will be doing more less-stress things. ResMar 17:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks is in order
Thank you for what you've done for my user page. It's nice to finally have something presentable after having been editing as long as I have on Wikipedia. I've finally found that page for Userpage requests and I moved on it. Thanks again. I hope to be able to get some advice in case of future edits, if that isn't too imposing. Unak78 (talk) 21:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Definetly. Of anything breaks or you want to change something, let me know. Cheers, ResMar 21:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Certainly. But I'll try to keep that from happening. Peace. Unak78 (talk) 21:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
RE:Userpage design center request
Hi! Thanks for responding to my request. Basically, I want to keep the color scheme that I'm currently having. I'm looking at expanding my userpage by adding more stuff in. I noticed that in your userpage you have a 'search' box. Can I have that in my profile too? What are some common stuff users have in their userpage? Thanks! BejinhanTalk 06:52, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks, Roger Davies talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- intrestingly enough I remember the last such election, and amazingly it doesn't seem so far behind in time...(6 months) ResMar 00:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Rumford Medal
Ta for the heads-up, but you might want to read WP:CANVASS. While the message was relatively neutral, the target audience was not. Ironholds (talk) 22:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- >:| Well I can't just sit around and do nothing while the FLC collapses. I didn't realize that there was a rule on Wikipedia against it. Well, one more way to try and gather votes foiled :(
You see, several of my FLCs/FACs have comepletely and utterly collapsed because no one came to vote-ever. And Rumford Prize (2) is coming dangerously close to that margin as well. Besides, I've only sent the message to what I see as the three most active members of the project (so far...). ResMar 22:37, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- How odd. I didn't have that problem with all my medal FLs (eleven so far, I think? Could be twelve). Ironholds (talk) 18:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it's a chronic problem with me. ALL of my Featured candidacies so far have been closed after threadbare activy. Not sure what I'm doing wrong. perhaps you have no problems because your name is posted all over the place-though I'm not exactly "unknown" (scratch that-I am :P) my name isn't posted all over, or in the "Christmas note with a song to annoy Ironholds" thing. ResMar 00:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Maybe
We'll both get lucky! Loihi might pass FAC and I'll have a happy birthday. ceranthor 11:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- Bad news, I had a TERRIBLE birthday. ceranthor 22:05, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- Lol. If Loihi actually passes I'll give god a million dollars :( ResMar 02:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations!
From what I can tell, Loihi Seamount was promoted to FA (although it has not shown up on the article page yet, as the bot has not gotten around to it yet). Congratulations on all your hard work in making this a fine article well-deserving of the star and a pleasure to read. Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 20:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Speaking of stars (congrats on the above), are you keeping track of Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Rumford Prize/archive2? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Loihi finally passed. I've got to update my stuff to go to that
- To Dabomb I havent been on wikipedia for a few days, *I'll get to it cordilly.
- And, I GOT A RESPONSE FROM Earthref.org. They say:
"Thanks for your interest in our bathymetric maps for Wikipedia. We are interested in cooperating with you. Could you please tell me a little more about where you would like to publish these images, what copyright you would need, and which maps you had in mind to use?"
This is obviously very important because if it goes, then we'll get an image bathymetric for ALL seamounts, and one for ALL POSSIBLE SEAMOUNTS, so yeah I've got to follow that thread with a copyright request.
Wow a lot has happened since I last logged in. Loihi passed! That's great to me! Sorry for the late response I plan to get to all of it today. ResMar 01:36, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- Congrats on the promotion of Loihi to FA. Viriditas (talk) 03:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi ResMar
Congrats on the article passing! Can you see the nomination page for Jack Harkness and rebut? Thanks man.~ZytheTalk to me! 17:51, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators, Roger Davies talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
What's up
- GA kohala (mountain)
- Then FA Hawaii hotspot
- Then...do a collab with someone...perhaps Mauna Kea? Dunno. ResMar 23:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC)